CN115176886B - Silage for high-protein low-fiber hybrid broussonetia papyrifera and preparation method thereof - Google Patents
Silage for high-protein low-fiber hybrid broussonetia papyrifera and preparation method thereof Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- CN115176886B CN115176886B CN202210866410.9A CN202210866410A CN115176886B CN 115176886 B CN115176886 B CN 115176886B CN 202210866410 A CN202210866410 A CN 202210866410A CN 115176886 B CN115176886 B CN 115176886B
- Authority
- CN
- China
- Prior art keywords
- silage
- broussonetia papyrifera
- treatment
- content
- molasses
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Active
Links
- 239000004460 silage Substances 0.000 title claims abstract description 171
- 241000705930 Broussonetia papyrifera Species 0.000 title claims abstract description 106
- 239000000835 fiber Substances 0.000 title claims abstract description 26
- 238000002360 preparation method Methods 0.000 title claims abstract description 18
- 239000002994 raw material Substances 0.000 claims abstract description 31
- 235000013379 molasses Nutrition 0.000 claims abstract description 30
- 108010059892 Cellulase Proteins 0.000 claims abstract description 28
- 229940106157 cellulase Drugs 0.000 claims abstract description 28
- 238000000855 fermentation Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 27
- 230000004151 fermentation Effects 0.000 claims abstract description 27
- 241000186679 Lactobacillus buchneri Species 0.000 claims abstract description 20
- 240000006024 Lactobacillus plantarum Species 0.000 claims abstract description 20
- 235000013965 Lactobacillus plantarum Nutrition 0.000 claims abstract description 20
- 241000191998 Pediococcus acidilactici Species 0.000 claims abstract description 20
- 229940072205 lactobacillus plantarum Drugs 0.000 claims abstract description 20
- 238000000034 method Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 17
- 238000002156 mixing Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 14
- 241000933832 Broussonetia Species 0.000 claims description 39
- 239000001963 growth medium Substances 0.000 claims description 12
- 241000196324 Embryophyta Species 0.000 claims description 10
- 239000010902 straw Substances 0.000 claims description 10
- KRKNYBCHXYNGOX-UHFFFAOYSA-N citric acid Natural products OC(=O)CC(O)(C(O)=O)CC(O)=O KRKNYBCHXYNGOX-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 claims description 8
- 238000003306 harvesting Methods 0.000 claims description 7
- XLYOFNOQVPJJNP-UHFFFAOYSA-N water Chemical compound O XLYOFNOQVPJJNP-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 claims description 7
- 235000015278 beef Nutrition 0.000 claims description 6
- 241000238631 Hexapoda Species 0.000 claims description 5
- 241000607479 Yersinia pestis Species 0.000 claims description 5
- 230000003213 activating effect Effects 0.000 claims description 5
- 238000005520 cutting process Methods 0.000 claims description 5
- 201000010099 disease Diseases 0.000 claims description 5
- 208000037265 diseases, disorders, signs and symptoms Diseases 0.000 claims description 5
- 229920001817 Agar Polymers 0.000 claims description 4
- WQZGKKKJIJFFOK-GASJEMHNSA-N Glucose Natural products OC[C@H]1OC(O)[C@H](O)[C@@H](O)[C@@H]1O WQZGKKKJIJFFOK-GASJEMHNSA-N 0.000 claims description 4
- 239000008272 agar Substances 0.000 claims description 4
- 229940041514 candida albicans extract Drugs 0.000 claims description 4
- -1 citric acid amine Chemical class 0.000 claims description 4
- 239000000284 extract Substances 0.000 claims description 4
- 239000008103 glucose Substances 0.000 claims description 4
- 239000000843 powder Substances 0.000 claims description 4
- 239000008223 sterile water Substances 0.000 claims description 4
- 239000012137 tryptone Substances 0.000 claims description 4
- 239000012138 yeast extract Substances 0.000 claims description 4
- 108090000623 proteins and genes Proteins 0.000 claims description 3
- 102000004169 proteins and genes Human genes 0.000 claims description 3
- 238000012258 culturing Methods 0.000 claims 1
- 235000019750 Crude protein Nutrition 0.000 abstract description 27
- 241000894006 Bacteria Species 0.000 abstract description 7
- 239000001913 cellulose Substances 0.000 abstract description 4
- 229920002678 cellulose Polymers 0.000 abstract description 4
- QTBSBXVTEAMEQO-UHFFFAOYSA-N Acetic acid Chemical compound CC(O)=O QTBSBXVTEAMEQO-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 30
- 238000011156 evaluation Methods 0.000 description 29
- 238000012360 testing method Methods 0.000 description 24
- JVTAAEKCZFNVCJ-UHFFFAOYSA-N lactic acid Chemical compound CC(O)C(O)=O JVTAAEKCZFNVCJ-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 22
- FERIUCNNQQJTOY-UHFFFAOYSA-N Butyric acid Chemical compound CCCC(O)=O FERIUCNNQQJTOY-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 20
- 239000000126 substance Substances 0.000 description 19
- 238000004458 analytical method Methods 0.000 description 17
- 230000001953 sensory effect Effects 0.000 description 17
- 244000309464 bull Species 0.000 description 14
- 235000016709 nutrition Nutrition 0.000 description 14
- 235000013336 milk Nutrition 0.000 description 12
- 239000008267 milk Substances 0.000 description 12
- 210000004080 milk Anatomy 0.000 description 12
- 239000004310 lactic acid Substances 0.000 description 11
- 235000014655 lactic acid Nutrition 0.000 description 11
- 241000219823 Medicago Species 0.000 description 9
- 235000017587 Medicago sativa ssp. sativa Nutrition 0.000 description 9
- 210000004767 rumen Anatomy 0.000 description 9
- 239000004615 ingredient Substances 0.000 description 8
- 239000000463 material Substances 0.000 description 8
- 241000283690 Bos taurus Species 0.000 description 7
- 235000019621 digestibility Nutrition 0.000 description 7
- 235000015097 nutrients Nutrition 0.000 description 7
- IJGRMHOSHXDMSA-UHFFFAOYSA-N Atomic nitrogen Chemical compound N#N IJGRMHOSHXDMSA-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 6
- 108090000790 Enzymes Proteins 0.000 description 6
- 102000004190 Enzymes Human genes 0.000 description 6
- 241000186660 Lactobacillus Species 0.000 description 6
- 235000013365 dairy product Nutrition 0.000 description 6
- 230000000694 effects Effects 0.000 description 6
- 229940088598 enzyme Drugs 0.000 description 6
- 229940039696 lactobacillus Drugs 0.000 description 6
- 238000003860 storage Methods 0.000 description 6
- 238000005406 washing Methods 0.000 description 6
- 241001465754 Metazoa Species 0.000 description 5
- XKMRRTOUMJRJIA-UHFFFAOYSA-N ammonia nh3 Chemical compound N.N XKMRRTOUMJRJIA-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 5
- 230000008901 benefit Effects 0.000 description 5
- 238000002386 leaching Methods 0.000 description 5
- 239000000654 additive Substances 0.000 description 4
- 230000000996 additive effect Effects 0.000 description 4
- QVGXLLKOCUKJST-UHFFFAOYSA-N atomic oxygen Chemical compound [O] QVGXLLKOCUKJST-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 4
- 230000015556 catabolic process Effects 0.000 description 4
- 238000006731 degradation reaction Methods 0.000 description 4
- 235000021050 feed intake Nutrition 0.000 description 4
- 239000000203 mixture Substances 0.000 description 4
- 230000035764 nutrition Effects 0.000 description 4
- 238000005457 optimization Methods 0.000 description 4
- 150000007524 organic acids Chemical class 0.000 description 4
- 229910052760 oxygen Inorganic materials 0.000 description 4
- 239000001301 oxygen Substances 0.000 description 4
- 235000019629 palatability Nutrition 0.000 description 4
- 238000011160 research Methods 0.000 description 4
- 241000282849 Ruminantia Species 0.000 description 3
- 239000002253 acid Substances 0.000 description 3
- 230000001580 bacterial effect Effects 0.000 description 3
- 150000001720 carbohydrates Chemical class 0.000 description 3
- 235000014633 carbohydrates Nutrition 0.000 description 3
- 230000000593 degrading effect Effects 0.000 description 3
- 238000001035 drying Methods 0.000 description 3
- 238000002474 experimental method Methods 0.000 description 3
- 229920005610 lignin Polymers 0.000 description 3
- 230000007935 neutral effect Effects 0.000 description 3
- 229910052757 nitrogen Inorganic materials 0.000 description 3
- 235000010482 polyoxyethylene sorbitan monooleate Nutrition 0.000 description 3
- 229920000053 polysorbate 80 Polymers 0.000 description 3
- 239000007787 solid Substances 0.000 description 3
- 102000003712 Complement factor B Human genes 0.000 description 2
- 108090000056 Complement factor B Proteins 0.000 description 2
- 230000004913 activation Effects 0.000 description 2
- 230000000433 anti-nutritional effect Effects 0.000 description 2
- 238000009395 breeding Methods 0.000 description 2
- 230000001488 breeding effect Effects 0.000 description 2
- 230000008859 change Effects 0.000 description 2
- 235000005911 diet Nutrition 0.000 description 2
- 230000037213 diet Effects 0.000 description 2
- XBDQKXXYIPTUBI-UHFFFAOYSA-N dimethylselenoniopropionate Natural products CCC(O)=O XBDQKXXYIPTUBI-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 2
- 238000005516 engineering process Methods 0.000 description 2
- 238000004519 manufacturing process Methods 0.000 description 2
- 238000005259 measurement Methods 0.000 description 2
- 230000000813 microbial effect Effects 0.000 description 2
- 238000012803 optimization experiment Methods 0.000 description 2
- 238000007789 sealing Methods 0.000 description 2
- 240000006439 Aspergillus oryzae Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000002247 Aspergillus oryzae Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- VGGSQFUCUMXWEO-UHFFFAOYSA-N Ethene Chemical compound C=C VGGSQFUCUMXWEO-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 1
- 239000005977 Ethylene Substances 0.000 description 1
- 206010016717 Fistula Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 241000287828 Gallus gallus Species 0.000 description 1
- 240000005979 Hordeum vulgare Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000007340 Hordeum vulgare Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 240000007594 Oryza sativa Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000007164 Oryza sativa Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- OAICVXFJPJFONN-UHFFFAOYSA-N Phosphorus Chemical compound [P] OAICVXFJPJFONN-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 1
- 240000004808 Saccharomyces cerevisiae Species 0.000 description 1
- 239000005708 Sodium hypochlorite Substances 0.000 description 1
- 229920002472 Starch Polymers 0.000 description 1
- 241000282887 Suidae Species 0.000 description 1
- 240000008042 Zea mays Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000005824 Zea mays ssp. parviglumis Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 235000002017 Zea mays subsp mays Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 230000004888 barrier function Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000009286 beneficial effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 239000003153 chemical reaction reagent Substances 0.000 description 1
- 235000013330 chicken meat Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 238000005056 compaction Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000007796 conventional method Methods 0.000 description 1
- 235000005822 corn Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 235000019784 crude fat Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 238000013461 design Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000001514 detection method Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000011161 development Methods 0.000 description 1
- 235000014113 dietary fatty acids Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 230000029087 digestion Effects 0.000 description 1
- 229940079919 digestives enzyme preparation Drugs 0.000 description 1
- 238000001704 evaporation Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000008020 evaporation Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000000605 extraction Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000000556 factor analysis Methods 0.000 description 1
- 229930195729 fatty acid Natural products 0.000 description 1
- 239000000194 fatty acid Substances 0.000 description 1
- 150000004665 fatty acids Chemical class 0.000 description 1
- 238000004858 feed analysis Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000003890 fistula Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000037406 food intake Effects 0.000 description 1
- BTCSSZJGUNDROE-UHFFFAOYSA-N gamma-aminobutyric acid Chemical compound NCCCC(O)=O BTCSSZJGUNDROE-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 1
- 210000004051 gastric juice Anatomy 0.000 description 1
- 238000011065 in-situ storage Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000002401 inhibitory effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000004811 liquid chromatography Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000007774 longterm Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000012986 modification Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000004048 modification Effects 0.000 description 1
- QJGQUHMNIGDVPM-UHFFFAOYSA-N nitrogen group Chemical group [N] QJGQUHMNIGDVPM-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 1
- 235000015816 nutrient absorption Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 230000000050 nutritive effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 229910052698 phosphorus Inorganic materials 0.000 description 1
- 239000011574 phosphorus Substances 0.000 description 1
- 239000008104 plant cellulose Substances 0.000 description 1
- 238000004321 preservation Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000008569 process Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000012545 processing Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000001737 promoting effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 235000019260 propionic acid Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- QQONPFPTGQHPMA-UHFFFAOYSA-N propylene Natural products CC=C QQONPFPTGQHPMA-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 1
- 125000004805 propylene group Chemical group [H]C([H])([H])C([H])([*:1])C([H])([H])[*:2] 0.000 description 1
- 238000013441 quality evaluation Methods 0.000 description 1
- IUVKMZGDUIUOCP-BTNSXGMBSA-N quinbolone Chemical compound O([C@H]1CC[C@H]2[C@H]3[C@@H]([C@]4(C=CC(=O)C=C4CC3)C)CC[C@@]21C)C1=CCCC1 IUVKMZGDUIUOCP-BTNSXGMBSA-N 0.000 description 1
- 235000009566 rice Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 238000000926 separation method Methods 0.000 description 1
- NESLWCLHZZISNB-UHFFFAOYSA-M sodium phenolate Chemical compound [Na+].[O-]C1=CC=CC=C1 NESLWCLHZZISNB-UHFFFAOYSA-M 0.000 description 1
- 238000013097 stability assessment Methods 0.000 description 1
- 239000008107 starch Substances 0.000 description 1
- 235000019698 starch Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 238000007619 statistical method Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000006467 substitution reaction Methods 0.000 description 1
- 239000013589 supplement Substances 0.000 description 1
- 235000018553 tannin Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 229920001864 tannin Polymers 0.000 description 1
- 239000001648 tannin Substances 0.000 description 1
- 229910021642 ultra pure water Inorganic materials 0.000 description 1
- 239000012498 ultrapure water Substances 0.000 description 1
- 238000005303 weighing Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000004580 weight loss Effects 0.000 description 1
Classifications
-
- A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
- A23—FOODS OR FOODSTUFFS; TREATMENT THEREOF, NOT COVERED BY OTHER CLASSES
- A23K—FODDER
- A23K30/00—Processes specially adapted for preservation of materials in order to produce animal feeding-stuffs
- A23K30/10—Processes specially adapted for preservation of materials in order to produce animal feeding-stuffs of green fodder
- A23K30/15—Processes specially adapted for preservation of materials in order to produce animal feeding-stuffs of green fodder using chemicals or microorganisms for ensilaging
- A23K30/18—Processes specially adapted for preservation of materials in order to produce animal feeding-stuffs of green fodder using chemicals or microorganisms for ensilaging using microorganisms or enzymes
-
- A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
- A23—FOODS OR FOODSTUFFS; TREATMENT THEREOF, NOT COVERED BY OTHER CLASSES
- A23K—FODDER
- A23K10/00—Animal feeding-stuffs
- A23K10/10—Animal feeding-stuffs obtained by microbiological or biochemical processes
- A23K10/12—Animal feeding-stuffs obtained by microbiological or biochemical processes by fermentation of natural products, e.g. of vegetable material, animal waste material or biomass
-
- A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
- A23—FOODS OR FOODSTUFFS; TREATMENT THEREOF, NOT COVERED BY OTHER CLASSES
- A23K—FODDER
- A23K10/00—Animal feeding-stuffs
- A23K10/30—Animal feeding-stuffs from material of plant origin, e.g. roots, seeds or hay; from material of fungal origin, e.g. mushrooms
-
- A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
- A23—FOODS OR FOODSTUFFS; TREATMENT THEREOF, NOT COVERED BY OTHER CLASSES
- A23K—FODDER
- A23K10/00—Animal feeding-stuffs
- A23K10/30—Animal feeding-stuffs from material of plant origin, e.g. roots, seeds or hay; from material of fungal origin, e.g. mushrooms
- A23K10/33—Animal feeding-stuffs from material of plant origin, e.g. roots, seeds or hay; from material of fungal origin, e.g. mushrooms from molasses
-
- A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
- A23—FOODS OR FOODSTUFFS; TREATMENT THEREOF, NOT COVERED BY OTHER CLASSES
- A23K—FODDER
- A23K20/00—Accessory food factors for animal feeding-stuffs
- A23K20/10—Organic substances
- A23K20/189—Enzymes
-
- A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
- A23—FOODS OR FOODSTUFFS; TREATMENT THEREOF, NOT COVERED BY OTHER CLASSES
- A23K—FODDER
- A23K50/00—Feeding-stuffs specially adapted for particular animals
- A23K50/10—Feeding-stuffs specially adapted for particular animals for ruminants
-
- A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
- A23—FOODS OR FOODSTUFFS; TREATMENT THEREOF, NOT COVERED BY OTHER CLASSES
- A23V—INDEXING SCHEME RELATING TO FOODS, FOODSTUFFS OR NON-ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AND LACTIC OR PROPIONIC ACID BACTERIA USED IN FOODSTUFFS OR FOOD PREPARATION
- A23V2400/00—Lactic or propionic acid bacteria
- A23V2400/11—Lactobacillus
-
- A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
- A23—FOODS OR FOODSTUFFS; TREATMENT THEREOF, NOT COVERED BY OTHER CLASSES
- A23V—INDEXING SCHEME RELATING TO FOODS, FOODSTUFFS OR NON-ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AND LACTIC OR PROPIONIC ACID BACTERIA USED IN FOODSTUFFS OR FOOD PREPARATION
- A23V2400/00—Lactic or propionic acid bacteria
- A23V2400/11—Lactobacillus
- A23V2400/169—Plantarum
-
- A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
- A23—FOODS OR FOODSTUFFS; TREATMENT THEREOF, NOT COVERED BY OTHER CLASSES
- A23V—INDEXING SCHEME RELATING TO FOODS, FOODSTUFFS OR NON-ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AND LACTIC OR PROPIONIC ACID BACTERIA USED IN FOODSTUFFS OR FOOD PREPARATION
- A23V2400/00—Lactic or propionic acid bacteria
- A23V2400/41—Pediococcus
- A23V2400/413—Acidilactici
-
- Y—GENERAL TAGGING OF NEW TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS; GENERAL TAGGING OF CROSS-SECTIONAL TECHNOLOGIES SPANNING OVER SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE IPC; TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y02—TECHNOLOGIES OR APPLICATIONS FOR MITIGATION OR ADAPTATION AGAINST CLIMATE CHANGE
- Y02P—CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION TECHNOLOGIES IN THE PRODUCTION OR PROCESSING OF GOODS
- Y02P60/00—Technologies relating to agriculture, livestock or agroalimentary industries
- Y02P60/80—Food processing, e.g. use of renewable energies or variable speed drives in handling, conveying or stacking
- Y02P60/87—Re-use of by-products of food processing for fodder production
Landscapes
- Life Sciences & Earth Sciences (AREA)
- Chemical & Material Sciences (AREA)
- Polymers & Plastics (AREA)
- Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
- Food Science & Technology (AREA)
- Animal Husbandry (AREA)
- Zoology (AREA)
- Biotechnology (AREA)
- Molecular Biology (AREA)
- Microbiology (AREA)
- Health & Medical Sciences (AREA)
- Physiology (AREA)
- Mycology (AREA)
- Botany (AREA)
- Sustainable Development (AREA)
- Biomedical Technology (AREA)
- Biochemistry (AREA)
- General Chemical & Material Sciences (AREA)
- Chemical Kinetics & Catalysis (AREA)
- Birds (AREA)
- Fodder In General (AREA)
Abstract
The invention provides a high-protein low-fiber hybrid broussonetia papyrifera silage and a preparation method thereof, wherein the method comprises the following steps: s1, preparing silage raw materials; s2, adding zymophyte, molasses and cellulase into the silage raw material, uniformly mixing, wrapping, silaging and fermenting, and obtaining the high-protein low-fiber hybrid broussonetia papyrifera silage after silage fermentation is completed; the zymocyte is prepared from lactobacillus plantarum, pediococcus acidilactici and lactobacillus buchneri according to the mass ratio of 2-4: 1:1, mixing; the total addition amount of the fermentation bacteria is 0.5X10 according to the weight of silage raw material 7 ～1.0×10 7 CFU/g, molasses addition amount of 10-30 g/kg, cellulase addition amount of 3×10 3 ～9×10 3 U/kg. The silage prepared by the method has high silage quality and high protein content; the cellulose content is low, the crude protein is 12-17%, the NDF is 38-53%, and the ADF is 31-40%.
Description
Technical Field
The invention relates to the technical field of silage preparation, in particular to a high-protein low-fiber hybrid broussonetia papyrifera silage and a preparation method thereof.
Background
As woody feed with high crude protein content, the CP (crude protein) content of the paper mulberry leaves is about 20 percent, which is obviously higher than that of rice, corn and barley, so that the paper mulberry leaves can be used as high-protein crude feed and have very much development prospect. However, in the process of developing and utilizing the paper mulberry feed resources, the paper mulberry feed resources have the advantages that the content of crude fibers in the paper mulberry is high, and anti-nutritional factors such as tannin and lignin are contained, so that the palatability of the feed can be affected by massive ingestion, the feed intake of animals is reduced, the digestion utilization rate is reduced, and the application of the paper mulberry as the feed is limited. Therefore, proper processing treatment is needed for the paper mulberry feed to reduce the content of cellulose and anti-nutritional factors and improve the palatability and nutrient digestibility of the feed.
At present, researches on the nutrition of broussonetia papyrifera have been mostly focused on broussonetia papyrifera leaves, for example, tu Yan and other research results on hybrid broussonetia papyrifera leaves show that the CP (crude protein) content in broussonetia papyrifera leaves is 28.7%, the ADF (acid washing fiber) content is 13.0%, and the NDF (neutral washing fiber) content is 15.9%. However, the yield of the broussonetia papyrifera leaves is low, the separation of the broussonetia papyrifera leaves is difficult to realize during harvesting, and the popularization in industry is not universal. While for ruminants, broussonetia papyrifera tender shoots may be ingested. However, research on the use of the whole broussonetia papyrifera strain as high-protein coarse fodder has not been reported, so that the supplement of related research data of the whole broussonetia papyrifera strain is needed.
It has been shown that the addition of a certain amount of paper mulberry feed has no significant effect on the growth performance of monogastric animals such as pigs, chickens and the like, but excessive addition can lead to reduced nutrient absorption rate of the monogastric animals on the feed. However, in the case of ruminants, ruminants are able to increase the digestibility of nutrients in feed by microbial fermentation in the rumen. Tu Yan and the like utilize fistula cattle to study the degradation rate of different parts of the hybrid broussonetia papyrifera in the rumen for 24 hours and 48 hours, and the result shows that the degradation rate of the rumen of CP (crude protein) and DM (dry matter) in the broussonetia papyrifera is higher than that of other crude feeds, especially the degradation rate of the rumen of broussonetia papyrifera leaves and twigs is about 90 percent. However, NDF (neutral washing fiber) and ADF (acid washing fiber) of the broussonetia papyrifera stems have low degradation rates in the rumen mainly due to relatively high contents of cellulose and lignin in the broussonetia papyrifera stems, which not only reduce palatability of the broussonetia papyrifera, but also cause that nutrient components of the broussonetia papyrifera are difficult to be absorbed and utilized by animals, and become barriers to the broussonetia papyrifera serving as high-quality protein feed.
The ensiling technology is that the fresh raw materials after harvesting are cut and crushed, then put into ensiling equipment for compaction, added with lactobacillus preparation or other auxiliary materials for promoting fermentation, and then sealed for preservation. The silage can promote the mass propagation of lactobacillus in anaerobic environment, and convert starch and WSC (soluble carbohydrate) into lactic acid, so that the pH of the silage is reduced to below 4.2, thereby effectively inhibiting the growth of putrefying bacteria and achieving the purpose of long-term storage of feed. Silage of hybrid broussonetia papyrifera can soften lignin or plant cellulose and improve the palatability of raw materials. For example, zhang Yimin et al add yeast and Aspergillus oryzae to broussonetia papyrifera leaves for fermentation.
Factors influencing silage mainly include the kind and amount of enzyme preparation, moisture content, WSC content, etc. The addition of the enzyme preparation should not be excessive, on the one hand, because of cost, and on the other hand, the excessive enzyme preparation may cause the tissue structure of the raw material to disintegrate and generate viscosity. In addition, the silage effect is poor when lactobacillus and other enzyme preparations are mixed. For example, YIfen Zhang et al study the silage effect of alfalfa under different temperature conditions by adding lactobacillus and cell degrading enzyme during silage of alfalfa, and the results show that the group added with lactobacillus and cell degrading enzyme has the highest WSC content and the group added with lactobacillus and cell degrading enzyme has the lowest ADF and NDF contents.
The buffer energy of the broussonetia papyrifera leaves is high, the content of soluble carbohydrate (WSC) is low, and the quality of fermentation of a single substance directly used for fermentation is poor; moreover, the fresh leaves of the paper mulberry have high water content, and the silage has large nutrition loss and is easy to fail to manufacture. Based on the above, it is necessary to provide a preparation method of high-protein low-fiber hybrid broussonetia papyrifera silage with high stability and good silage effect.
Disclosure of Invention
In order to solve the problems, the invention aims to provide the high-protein low-fiber hybrid broussonetia papyrifera silage with high stability and good silage effect and the preparation method thereof.
In order to achieve the above object, the technical scheme of the present invention is as follows.
A preparation method of high-protein low-fiber hybrid broussonetia papyrifera silage comprises the following steps:
s1, preparing silage raw materials;
s2, adding zymophyte, molasses and cellulase into the silage raw material of the S1, uniformly mixing, wrapping, silage fermentation, and obtaining the high-protein low-fiber hybrid broussonetia papyrifera silage after silage fermentation is completed;
wherein the fermentation bacteria are prepared from lactobacillus plantarum, pediococcus acidilactici and lactobacillus buchneri according to the mass ratio of 2-4: 1:1, mixing;
the total addition amount of the fermentation bacteria is 0.5X10 according to the weight of silage raw material 7 ～1.0×10 7 CFU/g, molasses addition amount of 10-30 g/kg, cellulase addition amount of 3×10 3 ～9×10 3 U/kg。
In the invention, the molasses contains abundant WSC, so that the dry matter and lactic acid content in silage can be improved, and the pH and ammonia nitrogen concentration can be reduced.
Further, the fermentation bacteria also comprise strain activation before being added into silage raw materials;
the strain activation is to culture and activate the zymophyte with MRS culture medium at 28-32 ℃ and pH 6.8-7.0.
Further, when the silage raw material is a whole broussonetia papyrifera strain, the mass ratio of the lactobacillus plantarum, the pediococcus acidilactici and the lactobacillus buchneri is 4:1:1.
Further, the silage raw material is obtained by cutting the whole broussonetia papyrifera into small sections of 2-4 cm.
Further, the silage material has a moisture content of 45-60% by weight of the silage material.
Further, the addition amount of the fermentation tubes was 1.0X10% based on the weight of the silage material 7 CFU/g, molasses addition of 30g/kg, cellulase addition of 9X 10 3 U/kg。
Further, when silage is a mixture of whole broussonetia papyrifera and straw, the mass ratio of lactobacillus plantarum, pediococcus acidilactici and lactobacillus buchneri is 2:1:1.
Further, the addition amount of the straw is 1-10% by weight of the silage raw material.
Further, the addition amount of the fermentation tubes was 1.0X10% based on the weight of the silage material 7 CFU/g, molasses addition of 30g/kg, cellulase addition of 6X 10 3 U/kg。
Further, the silage fermentation time is 40-60 days.
The invention also provides the high-protein low-fiber hybrid broussonetia papyrifera silage prepared by the preparation method.
The invention has the beneficial effects that:
1. the paper mulberry silage prepared by the preparation method has high silage quality and high protein content; the cellulose content is low, wherein the crude protein content is 12-17%, the NDF content is 38-53%, and the ADF content is 31-40%.
2. The fermentation bacteria formed by combining lactobacillus plantarum, pediococcus acidilactici and lactobacillus buchneri are matched with molasses and cellulase to be used for silage fermentation of paper mulberry, and the fermentation bacteria are high in stability and good in silage effect.
3. The paper mulberry silage can completely replace alfalfa hay in dairy cows or beef cattle ration, and the usage amount of the paper mulberry silage is 12.5%.
Detailed Description
The present invention will be described in further detail with reference to the following examples in order to make the objects, technical solutions and advantages of the present invention more apparent. It should be understood that the specific embodiments described herein are for purposes of illustration only and are not intended to limit the scope of the invention.
All other embodiments, which can be made by those skilled in the art based on the embodiments of the invention without making any inventive effort, are intended to be within the scope of the invention.
In the present invention, CP represents crude protein; DM represents a dry matter; NDF represents neutral washing fiber; ADF represents an acid washing fiber; WSC represents soluble carbohydrates; TVFA represents total volatile fatty acids; EE represents crude fat.
Branches and leaves: from Anhua Haoshan ecological breeding company in Liu An' an City of Anhua province.
Silage raw material: the paper mulberry with good growth vigor and no plant diseases and insect pests is harvested when the plant height is 1.2m, and is cut into small sections with the length of 2-4 cm by a guillotine, and the small sections are used as silage raw materials.
Test strain: lactobacillus plantarum, lactobacillus buchneri and Pediococcus acidilactici were purchased from the national collection of bacterial culture.
Molasses: purchased from Weifang Fengguan biological limited company.
Straw: is taken from Anhua Haoshan ecological breeding company in Liu Anhua province.
Molasses: purchased from Weifang Fengguan biological limited company.
Cellulase: purchased from Baker New Material Inc. in Huzhou.
The experimental methods described in the following examples are all conventional methods unless otherwise specified; the reagents and materials are commercially available unless otherwise specified.
Example 1
A preparation method of high-protein low-fiber hybrid broussonetia papyrifera silage comprises the following steps:
s1, harvesting the paper mulberry with good growth vigor and no plant diseases and insect pests at the plant height of 1.2m, and cutting the fresh paper mulberry into small sections with the length of 2-4 cm by using a guillotine as a silage raw material.
S2, activating strain
Lactobacillus plantarum, pediococcus acidilactici and Lactobacillus buchneri are all activated with MRS culture medium at 30deg.C and pH of 6.8 for use.
MRS culture medium comprises glucose 4g, tryptone 2g, yeast extract 1g, beef extract 2g, mnSO 4 ·4H 2 O 0.076g，MgSO 4 ·7H 2 O0.04 g, tween-80 0.2mL, K 2 HPO 4 0.4g, 0.4g of citric acid amine (3.2 g of agar powder is added to a solid culture medium), 200mL of sterile water and pH of 6.2-6.4.
S3, mixing lactobacillus plantarum, pediococcus acidilactici and lactobacillus buchneri according to the mass ratio of 4:1:1 to obtain zymophyte;
adding zymophyte, molasses and cellulase into the silage raw material of S1, wherein the addition amount of the zymophyte is 10 according to the weight of the silage raw material 7 CFU/g, molasses addition of 30g/kg, cellulase addition of 9X 10 3 U/kg; wrapping, ensiling and fermenting after mixing uniformly, wherein the time of ensiling and fermenting is 60 days; after silage fermentation is completed, the high-protein low-fiber hybrid broussonetia papyrifera silage is obtained.
Example 2
A preparation method of high-protein low-fiber hybrid broussonetia papyrifera silage comprises the following steps:
s1, harvesting the paper mulberry with good growth vigor and no plant diseases and insect pests at the plant height of 1.2m, cutting the fresh paper mulberry into small sections with the length of 2-4 cm by using a guillotine, adding straw accounting for 10% of the weight of the silage raw material, and uniformly mixing to obtain the silage raw material.
S2, activating strain
The lactobacillus plantarum, the pediococcus acidilactici and the lactobacillus buchneri are respectively cultured and activated by MRS culture medium at the temperature of 32 ℃ and the pH value of 7.0 for later use.
MRS culture medium comprises glucose 4g, tryptone 2g, yeast extract 1g, beef extract 2g, mnSO 4 ·4H 2 O 0.076g，MgSO 4 ·7H 2 O0.04 g, tween-80 0.2mL, K 2 HPO 4 0.4g, 0.4g of citric acid amine (3.2 g of agar powder is added to a solid culture medium), 200mL of sterile water and pH of 6.2-6.4.
S3, mixing lactobacillus plantarum, pediococcus acidilactici and lactobacillus buchneri according to the mass ratio of 2:1:1 to obtain zymophyte;
adding zymophyte, molasses and cellulase into the silage raw material of S1, wherein the addition amount of the zymophyte is 10 according to the weight of the silage raw material 7 CFU/g, molasses addition of 30g/kg, cellulase addition of 6X 10 3 U/kg; wrapping, ensiling and fermenting after mixing uniformly, wherein the time of ensiling and fermenting is 60 days; after silage fermentation is completed, the high-protein low-fiber hybrid broussonetia papyrifera silage is obtained.
Example 3
A preparation method of high-protein low-fiber hybrid broussonetia papyrifera silage comprises the following steps:
s1, harvesting the paper mulberry with good growth vigor and no plant diseases and insect pests at the plant height of 1.2m, cutting the fresh paper mulberry into small sections with the length of 2-4 cm by using a guillotine, and then drying in the shade for storage, wherein the water content of the silage raw material is kept to be 45-60 percent, and the silage raw material is used as silage raw material.
S2, activating strain
Lactobacillus plantarum, pediococcus acidilactici and Lactobacillus buchneri are all activated with MRS culture medium at 28deg.C and pH of 6.8 for use.
MRS culture medium comprises glucose 4g, tryptone 2g, yeast extract 1g, beef extract 2g, mnSO 4 ·4H 2 O 0.076g，MgSO 4 ·7H 2 O0.04 g, tween-80 0.2mL, K 2 HPO 4 0.4g, 0.4g of citric acid amine (3.2 g of agar powder is added to a solid culture medium), 200mL of sterile water and pH of 6.2-6.4.
S3, mixing lactobacillus plantarum, pediococcus acidilactici and lactobacillus buchneri according to the mass ratio of 4:1:1 to obtain zymophyte;
adding zymophyte, molasses and cellulase into the silage raw material of S1, wherein the addition amount of the zymophyte is 10 according to the weight of the silage raw material 7 CFU/g, molasses addition of 30g/kg, cellulase addition of 9X 10 3 U/kg; wrapping, ensiling and fermenting after mixing uniformly, wherein the time of ensiling and fermenting is 60 days; after silage fermentation is completed, the high-protein low-fiber hybrid broussonetia papyrifera silage is obtained.
Example 4
L was performed on 4 factors according to the method of example 1 16 (4 5 ) The orthogonal optimization test and the specific factor level are shown in table 1.
TABLE 6 Broussonetia papyrifera fresh silage orthogonal optimization test factor level
Note that: the strain proportion of the factor A is the mass ratio of lactobacillus plantarum, pediococcus acidilactici and lactobacillus buchneri.
Example 5
L was performed on 5 factors according to the method of example 2 16 (4 5 ) Orthogonal optimization experiments, specific factor levels are shown in table 2.
TABLE 2 Broussonetia papyrifera hybrid silage orthogonal optimization test factor level
Note that: the strain proportion of the factor B is the mass ratio of lactobacillus plantarum, pediococcus acidilactici and lactobacillus buchneri.
Example 6
L was performed on 5 factors according to the method of example 3 16 (4 5 ) Orthogonal optimization experiments, specific factor levels are shown in table 3.
TABLE 3 Broussonetia papyrifera semi-dry silage orthogonal optimization test factor level
Note that: the strain proportion of the factor B is the mass ratio of lactobacillus plantarum, pediococcus acidilactici and lactobacillus buchneri.
Silage of hybrid broussonetia papyrifera prepared in examples 1 to 6 is determined in terms of nutritional ingredients, aerobic stability, sensory index and chemical index.
1. Index measurement
1.1, determination of conventional nutritional ingredients
And collecting the harvested paper mulberry stem leaf samples, and measuring the DM, CP, ash, NDF, ADF, EE indexes and the like in a laboratory to determine the nutritive value. Taking part of silaged paper mulberry samples, and measuring indexes such as DM, CP, NDF, ADF, EE and the like after drying. The DM, ash, CP, EE content is measured by a method described in Zhang Liying and the like in feed analysis and feed quality detection technology; ADF and NDF were measured by the method of Van Soest et al.
1.2 measurement of aerobic stability
200g of each combination is taken and put into a self-sealing bag, a plurality of small holes are pricked, a large self-sealing bag is sleeved, pollution and moisture evaporation are prevented, and a thermometer is inserted to measure the temperature change. The sample was placed in the shade and 1 temperature change was recorded every 4 hours until the temperature of the sample exceeded ambient temperature 2 ℃.
1.3 in-situ sensory evaluation
And (5) performing on-site sensory evaluation after opening the silage bag, and observing the smell, color and texture of the silage by referring to silage quality evaluation standards.
And (5) taking part of silage, and drying the silage in an oven at 105 ℃ for 18 hours, wherein the weight loss is the silage moisture content.
Another 30g silage was placed in a 200mL triangular flask, 120mL of ultrapure water was added, stoppered, and placed in a4 ℃ freezer for 24h of extraction. After leaching, the leaching solution was filtered through quantitative filter paper, and the pH of the leaching solution was measured by using a Shanghai Lei Ci pHs-3C type precision pH meter.
1.4 chemical assessment
Subpackaging the filtered leaching solution in sensory evaluation in 2 5mL centrifuge tubes, storing in a refrigerator at-20deg.C, and measuring ammonia Nitrogen (NH) 3 -N) and organic acid (lactic acid, acetic acid and butyric acid) concentrations. NH of leaching liquor sample 3 -N concentration was determined using the "phenol-sodium hypochlorite method"; the Total Nitrogen (TN) is measured by a Kjeldahl nitrogen determination method; the concentration of the organic acid is determined by adopting a liquid chromatography method, and the total organic acid content is the sum of the acetic acid content, the butyric acid content and the lactic acid content. Ammonia nitrogen/total Nitrogen (NH) 3 N/TN) score and organic acid score (sum of lactic acid, acetic acid and butyric acid scores divided by 2) are added as the total score for the chemical assessment.
1.4 statistical analysis
The data were initially collated with Excel, single-factor analysis of variance with SPSS 13.0, duncan's multiple comparisons, P<0.05 is a significant difference, and the results are expressed as mean ± standard deviation. Orthogonal analysis, k, is carried out on silage fermentation scores by adopting a range analysis method and a comprehensive balance method i To average the level of the factor i, k i A larger value indicates a better (NH) 3 TN, ADF and NDF index, k i Smaller, more optimal level), extremeThe difference R is the difference between the maximum value and the minimum value in the average value of each level of the factor, and the larger the R value is, the larger the influence of the factor on the result is.
2. Results and analysis
2.1 fresh Broussonetia papyrifera silage results
2.1.1 fresh Broussonetia papyrifera silage sensory evaluation results
TABLE 4 fresh Brown results of silage sensory evaluation
Note that: k1, K2, K3, K4 represent the average of the results at levels 1, 2, 3, 4, respectively, and R represents the very poor of K1, K2, K3, K4 under each factor.
As can be seen from table 4, the pH of treatment 1 group was highest, significantly higher than the other treatment groups (P < 0.05), and the pH of treatment 5 group was lowest. The total score for treatment 5 was highest and the total score for treatment 1 was lowest. In the orthogonal analysis, the factors influencing the silage sensory evaluation of the fresh paper mulberry are from large to small, namely A > C > B > D, and the optimal combination is A4C4B4D3.
2.1.2 fresh Broussonetia papyrifera silage chemical assessment results
TABLE 5 fresh Broussonetia papyrifera silage chemical assessment results
As can be seen from Table 5, NH of 2 groups was treated 3 The highest N/TN content was significantly higher than in the treatment groups other than 3 (P<0.05 Treatment of 15 groups of NH 3 -the lowest N/TN content; the lactic acid content of the treatment 9 groups is highest, and the lactic acid content of the treatment 1 group is lowest; the acetic acid content of the treatment group 2 is the highest; the content of the acetic acid in the 9 groups of treatment is the lowest; the treatment group 1 had the highest butyric acid content, significantly higher than the other treatment groups (P<0.05 A) is provided; treatment 13 groups had the lowest butyric acid content; the total chemical rating of treatment 16 was the highest and the total chemical rating of treatment 2 was the lowest. In the orthogonal analysis, the influence factor of chemical evaluation is A from large to small>B>C>D, the optimal combination is A4B4C3D4。
2.1.3 evaluation of the aerobic stability of fresh Broussonetia papyrifera
TABLE 5 evaluation of fresh Broussonetia papyrifera silage aerobic stability
As can be seen from table 5, the aerobic stability of treatment 5 groups was highest, significantly higher than the other treatment groups (P < 0.05); the aerobic stability of treatment 1 group was lowest, significantly lower than the other treatment groups (P < 0.05). In the orthogonal analysis, the influence factors of the aerobic stability assessment are from large to small, A > B > C > D, and the optimal combination is A2B3C3D4.
2.1.4, fresh Broussonetia papyrifera silage nutrient assessment results
TABLE 6 evaluation results of fresh Broussonetia papyrifera silage nutritional ingredients
As can be seen from table 6, the CP content of treatment 14 groups was highest, and the CP content of treatment 1 group was lowest; ADF and NDF content was highest for treatment 1 group and lowest for treatment 10 groups. In the orthogonal analysis, the factors influencing the CP content are A > B > D > C from large to small, and the optimal combination is A4B4D3C4; the factor influencing the ADF content is A > B > C > D from large to small, and the optimal combination is A3B4C4D4; the factors influencing the NDF content are C > A > D > B from large to small, and the optimal combination is C4A3B4D4.
2.1.5, fresh Broussonetia papyrifera silage comprehensive balance assessment results
TABLE 7 comprehensive balance assessment results of fresh Broussonetia papyrifera silage
| Factors of | Sensory evaluation | Chemical assessment | Aerobic stability | CP | ADF | NDF |
| A (bacterial combination) | A4 | A4 | A2 | A4 | A3 | A3 |
| R | 8.33 | 9.59 | 111.17 | 1.73 | 1.33 | 2.28 |
| B (molasses additive amount) | B4 | B4 | B3 | B4 | B4 | B4 |
| R | 4.41 | 2.83 | 26.17 | 0.73 | 1.05 | 1.84 |
| C (cellulase addition amount) | C4 | C3 | C3 | C4 | C4 | C4 |
| R | 6.00 | 2.55 | 25.01 | 0.34 | 0.59 | 2.57 |
| D (silage time) | D3 | D4 | D4 | D3 | D4 | D4 |
| R | 2.91 | 1.78 | 11.34 | 0.71 | 0.57 | 2.00 |
As can be seen from Table 7, the factors affecting silage quality in fresh Broussonetia papyrifera silage are from large to small, the strain combination, the molasses addition amount, the cellulase addition amount and the silage time are respectively optimized at the levels of A4, B4, C4 and D4, namely the strain combination is 4:1:1, the molasses addition amount is 3%, and the cellulase addition amount is 9 multiplied by 10 3 U/kg, silage time 60 days.
2.2 Mixed Broussonetia papyrifera silage results
2.2.1 Mixed Broussonetia papyrifera silage sensory evaluation results
As can be seen from Table 8, the pH was highest in treatment 1, significantly higher than the other treatment groups (P < 0.05), and the pH was lowest in treatment 10. The total score for treatment 10 was highest and the total score for treatment 1 was lowest. In the orthogonal analysis, the influence factors on the silage sensory evaluation of the mixed paper mulberry are E > A > C > B > D from large to small, and the optimal combination is E4A2C4B2D3.
TABLE 8 results of Mixed Broussonetia papyrifera silage sensory evaluation
Note that: k1, K2, K3, K4 represent the average of the results at levels 1, 2, 3, 4, respectively, and R represents the very poor of K1, K2, K3, K4 under each factor.
2.2.2 Mixed Broussonetia papyrifera silage chemical assessment results
TABLE 9 Mixed Broussonetia papyrifera silage chemical assessment results
As can be seen from Table 9, the NH of 13 groups was treated 3 The highest N/TN content, significantly higher than in the other treatment groups (P<0.05 The NH3-N/TN content of the treated 8 groups is the lowest; the lactic acid content of treatment 14 was highest, the lactic acid content of treatment 1 was lowest, significantly lower than that of the other treatment groups (P<0.05 A) is provided; treatment 1 had the highest acetic acid content, significantly higher than the other treatment groups (P<0.05 The acetic acid content of treatment 14 groups was the lowest; the treatment group 1 had the highest butyric acid content, which was significantly higher than the other treatment groups (P<0.01 Treatment 11 groups had the lowest butyric acid content; the total score for treatment 10 was highest and the total score for treatment 1 was lowest. In the orthogonal analysis, the influence factor on the chemical evaluation of mixed broussonetia papyrifera silage is from large to small as B>D>A>E>And C, optimally combining to obtain the B3D3A2E4C4.
2.2.3 results of evaluation of the oxygen storage stability of Mixed Broussonetia papyrifera
TABLE 10 evaluation results of the oxygen storage stability of Broussonetia papyrifera
As can be seen from table 10, the aerobic stability of treatment 10 group was highest, significantly higher than the other treatment group (P < 0.05), the aerobic stability of treatment 1 was lowest, significantly lower than the other treatment group (P < 0.05). In the orthogonal analysis, the influence factors for evaluating the aerobic stability of the mixed broussonetia papyrifera silage are from large to small and are B > C > D > A > E, and the optimal combination is B2C3D3A2E3.
2.2.4 results of assessment of the nutritional ingredients of Mixed Broussonetia papyrifera silage
TABLE 11 evaluation results of silage nutritional ingredients of Mixed Broussonetia papyrifera
As can be seen from table 11, the CP content was highest in the treatment 3, 4 groups, significantly higher than in the other treatment groups (P < 0.05); the CP content of treatment 16 groups was lowest; ADF content was highest for treatment 13 and lowest for treatment 4; the NDF content of treatment 16 groups was highest, the NDF content of treatment 3 groups was lowest, significantly lower than the other treatment groups (P < 0.05). In the orthogonal analysis, the influence factors on the CP content of the mixed broussonetia papyrifera are from large to small, A is more than C is more than B is more than E=D, and the optimal combination is A1C4B3E4D4; the influence factors on the ADF content of the mixed paper mulberry are A > B > C > E > D from large to small, and the optimal combination is A1B3C3E4D3; the influence factors on the NDF content of the mixed paper mulberry are A > B > C > D > E from large to small, and the optimal combination is A1B4C4D4E4.
2.2.5, comprehensive balance assessment results of mixed Broussonetia papyrifera silage
Table 12 comprehensive balance assessment results for mixed Broussonetia papyrifera silage
| Factors of | Sensory evaluation | Chemical assessment | Aerobic stability | CP | ADF | NDF |
| A (straw additive) | A2 | A2 | A2 | A1 | A1 | A1 |
| R | 7.08 | 6.29 | 26.84 | 4.47 | 7.61 | 10.82 |
| B (combination of strains) | B2 | B3 | B2 | B3 | B3 | B4 |
| R | 4.59 | 8.04 | 48.67 | 0.58 | 1.17 | 3.04 |
| C (molasses additive amount) | C4 | C4 | C3 | C4 | C3 | C4 |
| R | 6.17 | 4.58 | 44.33 | 0.7 | 0.78 | 2.77 |
| D (cellulase addition amount) | D3 | D3 | D3 | D4 | D3 | D4 |
| R | 4.17 | 6.96 | 27.16 | 0.56 | 0.41 | 1.26 |
| E (silage time) | E4 | E4 | E3 | E4 | E4 | E4 |
| R | 8.84 | 5.29 | 16.17 | 0.56 | 0.69 | 1.06 |
As can be seen from Table 12, the factors affecting silage quality in mixed Broussonetia papyrifera silage are from large to small, B > A > C > D > E, the straw content, strain combination, molasses addition amount and cellulase addition amount are respectively optimized at A1 or A2, B3, C4, D3 and E4 levels, namely straw content is 0% or 10%, strain combination is 2:1:1, molasses addition amount is 3%, and cellulase addition amount is 6×10 3 U/kg, silage time 60 days. According to the test requirement, in order to ensure that the silage of the mixed broussonetia papyrifera is successful, sensory evaluation, chemical evaluation and aerobic stability indexes are taken asThe amount of straw added is therefore ultimately optimal at 10% for the priority index.
2.3, half-dried Broussonetia papyrifera silage results
2.3.1 results of sensory evaluation of silage of semi-dried Broussonetia papyrifera
TABLE 13 results of sensory evaluation of semi-dried Broussonetia papyrifera silage
Note that: k1, K2, K3, K4 represent the average of the results at levels 1, 2, 3, 4, respectively, and R represents the very poor of K1, K2, K3, K4 under each factor.
As can be seen from table 13, the pH of treatment 1 group was highest, significantly higher than the other treatment groups (P < 0.05), and the pH of treatment 8 group was lowest. The total score for treatment 4 was highest and the total score for treatment 1 was lowest. In the orthogonal analysis, the influence factors on silage sensory evaluation of the Broussonetia papyrifera are C > B > E > D > A from large to small, and the optimal combination is C4B4E4D4A2.
2.3.2 results of semi-dried Broussonetia papyrifera silage chemical assessment
TABLE 14 semi-dry Broussonetia papyrifera silage chemical assessment results
As can be seen from Table 14, the NH of group 13 is treated 3 The highest N/TN content, the lowest NH3-N/TN content for treatment of group 4; the lactic acid content of the treatment 4 group is highest, and the lactic acid content of the treatment 1 group is lowest; the acetic acid content of the treatment 16 groups is highest, and the acetic acid content of the treatment 4 groups is lowest; treatment 1 had the highest butyric acid content, significantly higher than the other treatment groups (P<0.05 Treatment 13 has the lowest butyric acid content; the total score for treatment 4 was highest and the total score for treatment 1 was lowest. In the orthogonal analysis, the influence factor on the semi-dry Broussonetia papyrifera silage chemical assessment is C from large to small>A>B>E>And D, the optimal combination is C4A2B3E4D4.
2.3.3 results of evaluation of the oxygen storage stability of semi-dried Broussonetia papyrifera
TABLE 15 evaluation results of semi-dried Broussonetia papyrifera silage aerobic stability
As can be seen from table 15, the aerobic stability of the treatment 10 group was highest, significantly higher than that of the other treatment groups (P < 0.05); the aerobic stability of treatment 1 group was lowest, significantly lower than the other treatment groups (P < 0.05). In the orthogonal analysis, the influence factors for evaluating the oxygen storage stability of the semi-dry broussonetia papyrifera are from large to small, namely A > C > B > D > E, and the optimal combination is A2C4B2D3E4.
2.3.4 results of assessing the silage nutritional ingredients of semi-dried Broussonetia papyrifera
Table 16 results of evaluation of semi-dried Broussonetia papyrifera silage nutritional ingredients
As can be seen from Table 16, the CP content of treatment 4 was highest, the CP content of treatment 1 was lowest, and significantly lower than that of the other treatment groups (P < 0.05). ADF content was highest for treatment 13 and lowest for treatment 4; the NDF content of treatment 1 group was highest, the NDF content of treatment 4 group was lowest, significantly lower than the other treatment groups (P < 0.05). In the orthogonal analysis, the influence factors on the CP content of the Broussonetia papyrifera are from large to small, B=C > A > E > D, and the optimal combination is B4C4A2E4D4; the influence factors on the ADF content of the mixed paper mulberry are A > C > B > D > E from large to small, and the optimal combination is A1C4B4D4E4; the influence factors on the NDF content of the mixed paper mulberry are from large to small, B > C > A > E > D, and the optimal combination is B4C4A1E4D4.
2.3.5, semi-dry Broussonetia papyrifera silage comprehensive balance assessment results
Table 17 silage comprehensive balance evaluation results of semi-dried Broussonetia papyrifera
| Factors of | Sensory evaluation | Chemical assessment | Aerobic stability | CP | ADF | NDF |
| A (moisture content) | A2 | A2 | A2 | A2 | A1 | A1 |
| R | 1.83 | 8 | 54.00 | 0.54 | 2.46 | 1.58 |
| B (combination of strains) | B4 | B3 | B2 | B4 | B4 | B4 |
| R | 6.00 | 7.29 | 28.34 | 0.91 | 1.00 | 2.66 |
| C (molasses additive amount) | C4 | C4 | C4 | C4 | C4 | C4 |
| R | 7.01 | 9.17 | 42.17 | 0.91 | 1.02 | 2.45 |
| D (cellulase addition amount) | D4 | D4 | D3 | D4 | D4 | D4 |
| R | 3.33 | 1.46 | 24.84 | 0.44 | 0.83 | 0.75 |
| E (silage time) | E4 | E4 | E4 | E4 | E4 | E4 |
| R | 4.08 | 4.63 | 4.17 | 0.46 | 0.49 | 0.96 |
As can be seen from Table 17, the factors affecting silage quality in semi-dry Broussonetia papyrifera silage are from large to small, namely A > C > B > D > E, the moisture content, the strain combination, the molasses addition amount, the cellulase addition amount and the silage time are respectively optimized according to the levels of A2, B4, C4, D4 and E4, namely the moisture content is 55%, the strain combination is 4:1:1, the molasses addition amount is 3%, and the cellulase addition amount is 9 multiplied by 10 3 U/kg, silage time 60 days.
Application example 1
The silage of the hybrid broussonetia papyrifera prepared in the embodiment of the invention is fed to milk bull, so that the influence of the silage on the growth performance, rumen fermentation parameters and apparent digestibility of the milk bull is illustrated. The silage of hybrid broussonetia papyrifera prepared by the method of examples 1 to 6 has substantially similar performance, and thus, the silage of hybrid broussonetia papyrifera prepared by the method of example 2 was used for the test.
Hybrid broussonetia papyrifera silage was prepared according to the method of example 2, each wrapper weighing 50kg, and the nutritional composition of the hybrid broussonetia papyrifera silage is shown in table 18.
Table 18 silage nutritional ingredients of Broussonetia papyrifera (DM/%)
The silage of hybrid broussonetia papyrifera prepared according to the method of example 2 was fed to dairy cows in the following manner:
1. test animals and feeding management
Experiments were carried out on a large-scale six-amp dairy farm 1-2 months 2021, and 30 dairy bull with average month age of about 12 months and weight of about 330kg were selected. The test cattle are raised in bulk, and eat and drink water freely. TMR ration is fed twice daily (8:00, 15:00) to ensure that the residual material amount is about 3%.
2. Test design and daily ration
According to the pairing experiment, the three groups are randomly divided into 3 groups, and 10 heads of each group are respectively fed with three different daily ration. The control group is fed with basic ration, and is prepared according to the NRC (2016) beef cattle nutrition requirement standard, so that the nutrition requirement in the fattening stage is met; test 1 group replaced 50% alfalfa hay in the diet with broussonetia papyrifera silage; test 2 groups replaced 100% alfalfa hay in the diet with broussonetia papyrifera silage; the nitrogen substitution, test ration composition and nutrient levels are shown in Table 19. The pre-feeding period of this test was 7d and the formal period was 30d.
Table 19 test ration composition and nutrient level
Note that: each kilogram of premix is provided with: VA 100000IU, VD 3 20000IU, VE 500IU, cu 400mg, mn 800mg, zn 1200mg, I228mg, se 7.5mg, co 8mg, ca 10%, total phosphorus 4%.
3. Influence of Broussonetia papyrifera silage on growth performance of milk bull
TABLE 20 influence of Broussonetia papyrifera silage on milk bull growth performance
As seen from Table 20, as Broussonetia papyrifera silage was increased instead of alfalfa hay, daily gain, dry matter feed intake and feed weight ratio were not significantly different for each test group of milk bulls (P > 0.05) compared to the control group.
4. Influence of Broussonetia papyrifera silage on rumen fermentation parameters of milk bull
TABLE 21 influence of Broussonetia papyrifera silage on rumen fermentation parameters of milk bull
As seen from table 21, there was no significant difference in gastric juice pH, TVFA, percentage of acetic acid, percentage of propionic acid, percentage of butyric acid, ratio of ethylene to propylene, NH3-N, and concentration of microbial protein (P > 0.05) for each test group compared to the control group.
5. Influence of Broussonetia papyrifera silage on apparent digestibility of milk bull feeds
TABLE 22 influence of Broussonetia papyrifera silage on apparent digestibility of milk bull feeds
As seen from table 22, none of the apparent digestibility differences of DM, CP, NDF, ADF and EE for each test group were significant (P > 0.05).
6. Analysis of economic benefit of paper mulberry silage feeding milk bull
TABLE 23 analysis of economic benefits of silage fed milk bulls
Note that: the labor cost and the equipment depreciation cost are not considered; the same column of data shoulder marks have no letters or contain the same letters to indicate that the difference is not significant (P > 0.05), and different letters to indicate that the difference is significant (P < 0.05).
As seen from table 23, the fresh weight feed intake of the test group 2 was significantly higher than that of the control group and the test group 1 (P < 0.05); daily feed costs were significantly higher for the control group than for the test 1 and test 2 groups (P < 0.05); day profit was significantly higher in the test group 2 than in the control group (P < 0.05).
The results show that:
(1) And (5) integrating the biological yield and the nutritional value of the paper mulberry, and determining the optimal harvesting height of the paper mulberry to be 1.2m.
(2) The best technological parameters of fresh paper mulberry silage are that the bacterial combination is lactobacillus plantarum: pediococcus acidilactici: lactobacillus buchneri is 4:1:1, molasses is added in an amount of 3%, and cellulase is added in an amount of 9×10 3 U/kg, silage time 60 days.
(3) The optimal technological parameters of the paper mulberry mixed silage are that the straw content is 10%, and the strain combination is lactobacillus plantarum: pediococcus acidilactici: lactobacillus buchneri is 2:1:1, molasses is added in an amount of 3%, and cellulase is added in an amount of 6 multiplied by 10 3 U/kg, silage time 60 days.
(4) The optimal technological parameters of semi-dry silage of broussonetia papyrifera are that the moisture content is 55%, and the strain combination is lactobacillus plantarum: pediococcus acidilactici: lactobacillus buchneri is 4:1:1, molasses is added in an amount of 3%, and cellulase is added in an amount of 9×10 3 U/kg, silage time 60 days.
(5) The silage of the paper mulberry is used for replacing 50% and 100% of alfalfa hay in daily ration, and the daily gain of the dairy cattle, the feed intake of dry matters, the feed weight ratio and other production performances are not obviously affected.
(6) The silage of the paper mulberry is used for replacing 50% and 100% of alfalfa hay in daily ration, and the rumen fermentation and nutrient digestibility of the milk bull are not obviously affected.
(7) Under the test condition, the silage of the paper mulberry in the fattening daily ration of the dairy bull can completely replace alfalfa hay, and the use amount of the silage of the paper mulberry is recommended to be 12.5% in consideration of economic benefit.
The foregoing description of the preferred embodiments of the invention is not intended to be limiting, but rather is intended to cover all modifications, equivalents, and alternatives falling within the spirit and principles of the invention.
Claims (2)
1. The preparation method of the high-protein low-fiber hybrid broussonetia papyrifera silage is characterized by comprising the following steps:
s1, harvesting paper mulberry with good growth vigor and no plant diseases and insect pests when the plant height is 1.2m, cutting fresh paper mulberry into small sections with the length of 2-4 cm by using a guillotine, adding straw accounting for 10% of the weight of silage raw materials, and uniformly mixing to obtain silage raw materials;
s2, activating strain
Respectively culturing and activating lactobacillus plantarum, pediococcus acidilactici and lactobacillus buchneri at 32 ℃ and pH7.0 with MRS culture medium for later use;
MRS culture medium comprises glucose 4g, tryptone 2g, yeast extract 1g, beef extract 2g, mnSO 4 ·4H 2 O 0.076 g，MgSO 4 ·7H 2 O0.04 g, tween-80.2 mL, K 2 HPO 4 0.4g, citric acid amine 0.4g, agar powder 3.2g, sterile water 200mL and pH 6.2-6.4;
s3, lactobacillus plantarum, pediococcus acidilactici and lactobacillus buchneri are mixed according to the mass ratio of 2:1:1, mixing to obtain zymophyte;
adding zymophyte, molasses and cellulase into the silage raw material of S1, wherein the addition amount of the zymophyte is 10 according to the weight of the silage raw material 7 CFU/g, molasses addition of 30g/kg, cellulase addition of 6X 10 3 U/kg; wrapping, ensiling and fermenting after mixing uniformly, wherein the time of ensiling and fermenting is 60 days; after silage fermentation is completed, the high-protein low-fiber hybrid broussonetia papyrifera silage is obtained.
2. A high protein low fiber hybrid broussonetia papyrifera silage prepared by the method of claim 1.
Priority Applications (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202210866410.9A CN115176886B (en) | 2022-07-22 | 2022-07-22 | Silage for high-protein low-fiber hybrid broussonetia papyrifera and preparation method thereof |
Applications Claiming Priority (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202210866410.9A CN115176886B (en) | 2022-07-22 | 2022-07-22 | Silage for high-protein low-fiber hybrid broussonetia papyrifera and preparation method thereof |
Publications (2)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CN115176886A CN115176886A (en) | 2022-10-14 |
| CN115176886B true CN115176886B (en) | 2024-03-22 |
Family
ID=83521506
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN202210866410.9A Active CN115176886B (en) | 2022-07-22 | 2022-07-22 | Silage for high-protein low-fiber hybrid broussonetia papyrifera and preparation method thereof |
Country Status (1)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| CN (1) | CN115176886B (en) |
Citations (6)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN104365995A (en) * | 2014-11-22 | 2015-02-25 | 青岛蔚蓝生物集团有限公司 | Microbial additive for preparing silage |
| CN106036029A (en) * | 2016-07-11 | 2016-10-26 | 南宁学院 | Manufacturing technology of silage |
| CN106148249A (en) * | 2016-09-12 | 2016-11-23 | 江苏省农业科学院 | A kind of lactic acid bacteria microbial inoculum being applicable to grass silage and application thereof |
| CN109380598A (en) * | 2017-08-07 | 2019-02-26 | 康盛京构（北京）科技有限公司 | A kind of paper mulberry ensilage and preparation method thereof, purposes |
| CN109536416A (en) * | 2018-12-27 | 2019-03-29 | 南昌大学 | It is a kind of degrade feed with paper-mulberry leaf tannin silage inoculants bacteria preparation and its application method |
| CN113397039A (en) * | 2021-06-15 | 2021-09-17 | 大理白族自治州畜牧工作站 | Hybrid paper mulberry silage and processing method thereof |
Family Cites Families (1)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CA2500916A1 (en) * | 2002-10-08 | 2004-04-08 | Leanne Gail Robinson | Substitute for animal protein in cattle feed |
-
2022
- 2022-07-22 CN CN202210866410.9A patent/CN115176886B/en active Active
Patent Citations (6)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN104365995A (en) * | 2014-11-22 | 2015-02-25 | 青岛蔚蓝生物集团有限公司 | Microbial additive for preparing silage |
| CN106036029A (en) * | 2016-07-11 | 2016-10-26 | 南宁学院 | Manufacturing technology of silage |
| CN106148249A (en) * | 2016-09-12 | 2016-11-23 | 江苏省农业科学院 | A kind of lactic acid bacteria microbial inoculum being applicable to grass silage and application thereof |
| CN109380598A (en) * | 2017-08-07 | 2019-02-26 | 康盛京构（北京）科技有限公司 | A kind of paper mulberry ensilage and preparation method thereof, purposes |
| CN109536416A (en) * | 2018-12-27 | 2019-03-29 | 南昌大学 | It is a kind of degrade feed with paper-mulberry leaf tannin silage inoculants bacteria preparation and its application method |
| CN113397039A (en) * | 2021-06-15 | 2021-09-17 | 大理白族自治州畜牧工作站 | Hybrid paper mulberry silage and processing method thereof |
Also Published As
| Publication number | Publication date |
|---|---|
| CN115176886A (en) | 2022-10-14 |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| Wang et al. | Effects of ensiling time on banana pseudo-stem silage chemical composition, fermentation and in sacco rumen degradation. | |
| Ertekin et al. | Effects of lactic acid bacteria inoculation in pre-harvesting period on fermentation and feed quality properties of alfalfa silage | |
| CN112890004B (en) | Whole cassava plant biological fermentation feed and preparation method thereof | |
| CN113273645B (en) | Silage method of mulberry green feed | |
| Li et al. | Silage fermentation, chemical composition and ruminal degradation of king grass, cassava foliage and their mixture | |
| US20160000118A1 (en) | Total mixed rations for ruminants including cephalaria joppensis | |
| CN114027404A (en) | Silage additive for corn silage and application thereof | |
| Naeini et al. | Effects of urea and molasses supplementation on chemical composition, protein fractionation and fermentation characteristics of sweet sorghum and bagasse silages as alternative silage crop compared with maize silage in the arid areas. | |
| CN117617376A (en) | Fermented feed based on fresh ginger seedling and application of fermented feed in improvement of growing performance of fattening pigs | |
| Xie et al. | Effects of mixed sugarcane tops and napiergrass silages on fermentative quality, nutritional value, and milk yield in water buffaloes | |
| CN115176886B (en) | Silage for high-protein low-fiber hybrid broussonetia papyrifera and preparation method thereof | |
| Saeed et al. | Effect of addition of different levels of baker’s yeast Saccharomyces cerevisae on fermentation quality and nutritive value of ensiled corn crop residuals | |
| CN112890030B (en) | Feed for ruminants and preparation method thereof | |
| Morm et al. | Gas kinetics, rumen characteristics, and in vitro degradability of varied levels of dried and fresh cassava leaf top fermented with cassava pulp | |
| Khanday et al. | A review on fermentation quality of paddy straw silage | |
| CN107912606A (en) | A kind of hay silage feed containing agricultural crop straw and preparation method thereof | |
| CN114304388A (en) | Grass meal feed and processing method thereof | |
| CN112998139A (en) | Additive for ensiling peanut seedlings and ensiling method | |
| CN113995052B (en) | Ivory sugarcane tail leaf silage and preparation method thereof | |
| Ţîţei et al. | Agroeconomic value of some Lathyrus and Vicia species in the Republic of Moldova | |
| CN116831224B (en) | Preparation method of fermented pennisetum sinese feed | |
| Aydın | The effect of cake waste addition to alfalfa silage on silage quality and fermentation properties | |
| Riani et al. | The Effect of Addition of Onggok as a Mixed Material in the Making of Complete Feed Silage on the Digestibility of BK, BO and NH3 production In-Vitro | |
| CN107094990A (en) | A kind of wet-milling product method of Woody feed | |
| RU2480022C2 (en) | Farm animals fodder |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination | ||
| TA01 | Transfer of patent application right |
Effective date of registration: 20230403 Address after: 230036 No. 130 Changjiang West Road, Shushan District, Anhui, Hefei Applicant after: Anhui Agricultural University Applicant after: Anhui Huahao ecological breeding Co.,Ltd. Address before: 230036 No. 130 Changjiang West Road, Shushan District, Anhui, Hefei Applicant before: Anhui Agricultural University |
|
| TA01 | Transfer of patent application right | ||
| GR01 | Patent grant | ||
| GR01 | Patent grant |